Very well executed

Excellent, a Must See

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

"Labyrinth of Lies" from 2014 is a German film about a young attorney, Johann Radmann (Alexander Fehling) (a combination of three people in reality) in 1958 who decides to go after the bakers, the teachers, the everyday workers who were enforcers of some kind at Auschwitz, a place not many people, including Radmann, had heard of. And when he learns from a friend (Johannes Krisch) who was there how he lost his twin girls (a gutwrenching scene) Johann becomes obsessed with Josef Mengele and is determined to bring him to justice. His mentor and boss, the attorney general Fritz Bauer (a real person) has wanted to do this for years and puts Radmann in charge of the investigation. Bauer is played by the late Gert Voss, who was obviously quite ill when he made this movie. Bauer is a solid presence who knows too well the difficulties his young charge will face and tries to help him.We've seen the basic premise of this film many times- the young, idealistic man taking on the bureaucracy and the stonewallers who insist that they need to "draw the line" regarding the war experience and forget about it. "They were soldiers," "It was war," he is told. But did being soldiers and being at war mean that they treated their prisoners sadistically, starved them, shot them for minor offenses, and herded them into gas chambers?For the young people, underneath it all is a fear as they learn about the atrocities - what was their fathers' involvement in the war? Is it true that nearly everyone was a member of the Nazi Party? Radmann finds this unacceptable, not realizing that being a member of the party in no way meant you accepted their principles, you just didn't have a choice.One interesting aspect of the film was that while some atrocities were described, nothing was shown, and somehow it was all the more devastating. The film had one big problem, and that was the romantic subplot that did not contribute at all to the movie and, in fact, cluttered it.It took the Germans quite a while to accept what happened, although deep down I think many suspected and were uneasy. Radmann believes, "To remain silent is to poison our democracy." I suppose it's a bit like trying to live a normal life after an unacknowledged trauma happens. At some point, one must face it.The acting is emotional and powerful -- Fehling does a nice job of going from an attorney dealing with traffic violations to a passionate man who wants justice. All of the acting is excellent.Someone on this board said that Phoenix was a better film about post-World War II in Germany. It is a better film but quite different from "Labyrinth of Lies." It deals with the immediate aftermath of World War II. It is much more involving - but I give Labyrinth of Lies high marks.

While many movies have been made about WWII and the Holocaust, few have been made concerning the rebuilding of Germany after the war. There is little doubt that this would have been a fascinating time in history to examine and yet I for one have rarely heard it discussed. Until now. LABYRINTH OF LIES tells the story of what could have been the greatest cover up in history had it not been for several brave individuals who wanted to make sure the truth was told.Johann Radmann (Alexander Fehling) is a recent addition to the prosecutor's office in Frankfurt. The year is 1958 and the war has been over now for 13 years. Given the task of handling minor cases like traffic tickets, Radmann has his curiosity piqued when a journalist confronts the head prosecutor claiming that a man has recognized one of the guards from Auschwitz working as a grade school teacher. Ignored by the head man, Radmann takes it upon himself to talk to Thomas Gnielka (Andre Szymanski), the reporter.While many of us today know full well what happened at Auschwitz at this time it wasn't common knowledge. Gnielka takes Radmann with him to meet Simon Kirsch, the Auschwitz survivor who gave him this information. As Radmann gets more and more involved in the lives of these two men as well as becoming a part of their circle of friends, he wants to take on this case. But that's where the first impediment comes in as his supervisor wants the case ignored. Fortunately that's not the case with the head of the department, Fritz Bauer (Gert Voss).A Jew himself, Bauer appoints Radmann the head of the investigation and sets him up with his own secretary and office. Radmann begins to look into Simon's claim but finds his path blocked by people in his government as well as U.S. representatives remaining after the occupation. No one wants the truth of Auschwitz to be revealed and they will do anything to keep what happened secret.With the guiding hand of Bauer to set him on the right path, Radmann begins to uncover the secret history of Auschwitz and what was done by the German people, some just following orders but the more horrendous of the group giving those orders with apparent glee and joy. At the top of his list is Josef Mengele. When Radmann learns that Mengele travels without fear between Germany and his home in South America he is outraged. But it is his focus on Mengele that nearly brings his investigation to a halt. Only through dogged determination will he find the opportunity to find those behind Auschwitz.What makes this movie interesting is not the story of Auschwitz itself but the fact that so many were willing to hide this piece of history for what they considered the greater good, the rebuilding of a country already devastated by a war their leaders had created. But can the healing actually take place if the wounds are hidden rather than taken care of? That becomes the central question asked in this film.It's not just the bureaucrats that attempt to ignore the past either. A side story of Radmann falling in love with a beautiful dress designer who is part of that Bohemian group that Gnielka surrounds himself with ties in with the story as well. While outraged at first when well connected and wealthy bureaucrats and their wives set her up with her own shop and business, she begins to find that she too is caught up in the silence rather than the correction of history. Like most of those who were involved in the war she simply wants to move on and forget about the past no matter how terrible the atrocities were.Let me say now that if subtitles are not your thing you'll probably pass this one by. But if you do you short change yourself from seeing a great movie. It's not a metaphor for current history, it's not making a hugely political statement about the world today, it's discussing the past and a history that was not just almost forgotten but hidden away under mounds of paperwork and by people who were once involved in those brutal places but now are connected enough with officials that they feel safe.The movie has a stunning look to it with some beautiful cinematography that could have been found drab but instead feels real. The acting it done so well that even with translation the performances on display here convey the emotions so well that you find yourself wondering from moment to moment what will happen next as well as being involved with each character on screen.When all is said and done, in what some have found a slightly faulty ending wrapping things up too neatly, you have a compelling story that offers zero dull moments and plenty of drama that will hold your attention from start to finish. For me a great movie is one that I know I'll pull out and watch again. This is one of those movies.

Labyrinth of Lies is a 2014 German film about the Frankfurt Auschwitz trials that took place between 1963 and 1965. What distinguished the Frankfurt trails from all the other trials was that they were based on German law and because they happened 20+ years after the war, they were limited to murder charges. Several Nazis had been tried previously but they were convicted under international law and occurred right after the war.The film begins in 1958 as a young prosecutor Johann Radmann (marvelously played by Alexander Fehling) is attracted to the case by a reporter (Andre Szymanski), and given support by the federal Attorney General (Gert Voss who is simply riveting). They must work against the denials, cover-ups and vested interests that try to keep the issue quiet.The film gives you a real feel of the late 50s, and the photography and music support an excellent cast who do wonderful work. In a film about the holocaust, there is a tendency to shock, but director Giulio Ricciarelli skillfully shows that less is more.There are some places where the film seems more like a docudrama, and some issues (e.g., Radmann's relationship with his mother) are only hinted at. But overall it's an excellent film, and while it may not be an equivalent to "Judgment at Nuremberg", it is well worth viewing.

It's always fascinating to see how WWII still lives on. The question of remembering vs letting bygones be bygones is still as relevant as ever. It seems like every year or so another film on the Holocaust is released. All the more interesting then when it's Germany releasing such a film. Im Labyrinth des Schweigens takes a (for me at least) little explored subsection of postwar Germany, the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trials that started in 1963.Johann Radmann is a typical protagonist: young and ambitious; he's also a lawyer. Besides the fact he, like many of his countrymen, is oblivious to the horrors of Auschwitz and the Holocaust is his only character flaw. When an angry journalist alerts him to this fact, he starts to pursue the case of the unprosecuted SS officers with unmatched zeal. Time and again, however, he finds himself with confronted with a society either too ignorant or too unwilling to air its dirty laundry, to really get its troubled past out in the open. Nevertheless, after a herculean effort on the part of Radmann and others, the trial did eventually took place which led to the conviction of 17 people—Gestapos, dentists, adjutants and so on—who were involved in the horrors of Auschwitz.If there's anything Im Labyrinth des Schweigens does well, it's conveying the very silence conveyed in the title. The notion that Nazism was rooted out with the Nuremberg trials is treated with great disdain by the film. The film conveys the naiveté of many of Germany's citizens at the time as well as their reasons for doing so. There's a short scene that perfectly encapsulates this idea: Radmann and his superior are at odds with two colleagues. One of them states that digging up this part of Germany's past can only do more harm than good. Just now, when we're 'trying to move on', a case like this might force every German child to look at his parents with suspicion. Such an effect is toxic he claims to which Radmann's superior responds that it's precisely the forced silence which is toxic, particularly in a democracy which is still so young. In a single short scene we're treated to a convincing representation of both sides of the argument.The film has two weaknesses: strange tonal shifts and a boring, irrelevant romance. The first one is difficult to describe as it makes it sound like I wanted Im Labyrinth to be a melodramatic trauermarsch of sorts with zero comic relief. This is not the case. Aptly timed humor and other non-dramatic content can add greatly to character development and so on, but with Im Labyrinth I felt there were certain tonal inconsistencies. It also doesn't help the film features an incredibly forced romance between Radmann and a young woman. I get that the romance is there to generate a conflict not dissimilar to Fincher's Zodiac, where the investigator's family life is threatened by his obsessions. Im Labyrinth tries to do the same thing, but—save for a few moments—the romance is never really connected to the main storyline, so it feels like an afterthought. There's also some really cringe-worthy writing: during their first (and thankfully only) lovemaking session, she for some reason tells him that 'life's good'…uhh, okay. You see where I'm going with this? It just feels like it's going through the motions. The filmmakers first create the obligatory romance and then threaten to disrupt it to make us feel for Radmann, but it never works. This is made all the more strange by the fact that a certain plot twist regarding Radmann's own family is far more convincing in making us feel for him.All in all though, despite the occasional cringe, Im Labyrinth des Schweigens is very interesting to watch. In the end, it undeniably succeeds at what is undoubtedly its main task: illuminating the why and how of Germany's postwar silence on the Holocaust.